Masterwork Talk:Main Page

Created --Briess (talk) 17:19, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

To-do list?

I feel like it would be a good idea for everyone to add various things that will need work. --Lawman0 (talk) 21:22, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I made a placeholder here. Feel free to add things to it. Also, you can just create a blank article with {{av}} and tag it with {{stub}}. --Lethosor (talk) 20:11, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality

Should articles in this namespace be rated? I don't see any reason not to (except that the overall percentages might not be accurate), but it looks like the categories were deleted. Thoughts? --Lethosor (talk) 20:59, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I nuked the categories after creating them because I did something wrong when trying to extend the quality template. I think it's worthwhile, it just may need someone who can decipher that template and fix it >.> --Briess (talk) 05:04, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I think I fixed it for now (I admit, it is confusing with a Masterwork namespace and rating in the same template :) ) --Lethosor (talk) 01:33, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Pretentious

Since when did the "masterwork" mod become important important enough to deserve incorporation into the wiki? Does this mean that we can other mods' content to the wiki? There is a risk that "vanilla" articles will become contaminated with MW links, in the sense that a noob user could go to a MW page without knowing that it was an unofficial mod. --UristDaVinci (talk) 04:40, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

It's an experiment I authorized. There are enough Masterwork Mod users that a wiki would help them greatly, and considering it's the same game, it seems an appropriate place to store content. We already allow mod information on the wiki (we even have an entire namespace for it, and have had it since before we even did versioning on this wiki), so this is not really that much different. There is little risk that vanilla articles would be contaminated with MW links, as you put it, because frankly it doesn't make sense to do it. We're also experimenting with templates to make it obvious that this is mod content as well. I think calling this pretentious is pretentious in its own right. --Briess (talk) 05:03, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

You had a a good arguement until you called him pretentious as well. Mods and espically this one deserve their own place on the wiki, but I don't think it should be be incorperated to the front page. Lets not be favoring anything in paticular; a framework and set of rules should be made for mod pages. Honestly, its all or nothing. Also, what defines "enough" users? Comon guys lets be professional about this to some extent. If anyone cares to retort this I'll just let them know now I dont intend to argue the point beyond what I've said. Its just food for thought.

Av template

What do you think about using the same template ( {{av}} ) for vanilla and masterwork articles? I think using it would help provide an easy reference between similar articles (for example, DF2012:Metal and Masterwork:Metal), as well as providing a more consistent look. (I've also found a way to hide the Masterwork links automatically, so that shouldn't be a problem). --Lethosor (talk) 22:30, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Here's an example of what I'm talking about (I can probably make a few changes, if necessary). Thoughts? --Lethosor (talk) 15:06, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Looks good, although I wonder if there's a way to compact the Mod: Masterwork etc stuff some more. It may be tough with the existing template. I also think we should explore using a different color for mod articles. Thanks for driving on that, by the way. --Briess (talk) 19:00, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I got the height to be equal for both either-or articles: [1]. Working on colors now. --Lethosor (talk) 19:47, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

MDF:2019

The latest release cut things things back somewhat from the version cuurently covered on here, is the plan to cover this newer, slimmer version or retain the information for the older version? Omnikron13 (talk) 08:45, 11 November 2019 (UTC)